What’s your call?
| 1♣ | 1♦ | 1♥ | 1♠ | 1NT |
| 2♣ | 2♦ | 2♥ | 2♠ | 2NT |
| 3♣ | 3♦ | 3♥ | 3♠ | 3NT |
| 4♣ | 4♦ | 4♥ | 4♠ | 4NT |
| 5♣ | 5♦ | 5♥ | 5♠ | 5NT |
| 6♣ | 6♦ | 6♥ | 6♠ | 6NT |
| 7♣ | 7♦ | 7♥ | 7♠ | 7NT |
| Pass |
While people playing a Polish Club system (1♣ shows either a weak balanced hand, a natural 1♣ opening or any strong hand and heaven only knows how you get diamonds into the picture) may have difficulty with this hand, no one else has a problem – certainly none of these experts.
Lawrence: “1♣. This looks like a typo to me. The only alternative to 1♣ is 1♣ Precision.”
Lee: “1♣ seems like a textbook opening bid to me.”
Rigal: “If this was a hand designed to get me to pass, then I fail the test. If it was designed to see if I can count which is my longest suit, then I pass the test. If it was designed to find out if I think the hand is worth a reverse, then shame on you! Take away both jacks and I still open 1♣ and bid diamonds. As it is, I’d rather open 5NT pick-a-minor than 1♦ .”
Weinstein: “I want in on the next round of Polish vodka.” Spoken like a true Vanderbilt champion.
Hampson: “I have a chance to open my longest suit at the one level. I can’t think of some magical alternative.”
Cohen asks, “Dare I predict a unanimous panel – always a potential way to look like a fool? It is completely routine to open 1♣, planning to bid diamonds twice. Surely I am worth it!”
Falk chimes in. “What’s the problem? Surely no expert is going to bid 2♣ on a two-suiter with only 15 HCP, especially with 5–6. This hand, however, is good enough not just to reverse, but probably to force to five of a minor if partner can show even a semblance of support. If I get my way, I bid 1♣ now, 2♦ next, then probably 4♦ .”
1♣ by Abdou. “This hand has lots of potential, but it seems like partner has many major-suit cards. I want to be able to show my suits and judge the auction. Starting with a higher bid will jam my own auction.”
Sanborn, too. “1♣ planning on a reverse or some competitive notrump bid to show the minors. The clubs look more than one card longer than the diamonds.”
Boehm calls a 2♣ opening “shortsighted, since the opponents may compete. Opening 1♣, I can get my suits across.”
Colchamiro bids 1♣, but muses, “1♦ is certainly possible to prepare for the likely spade barrage from the opponents.”
Stack observes, “It is not often you will hold two cards in the majors and it goes three passes to you. If this hand is held in first seat, then probably a 1♦ bid should be used in anticipation of spade preempts. Now it seems that 1♣ followed by bidding diamonds twice will accurately describe the playing strength of this hand.”
